RealGM

Yes or no?

I say do it. The Pistons have already given up on him at PG, and are likely to add a better SG in FA or the draft this summer. Which means Knight is expendable, and its hard to find equal value for a player on a rookie deal because their contracts are so small. In this case, there's another team who also has a player of similar talent on a rookie deal who they need to trade, and happens to play the position we need most - PG. It makes a lot of sense for both sides.

I don't think they are going to find a better player on a rookie contract than Knight, whose team is wiling to trade them for Bledsoe. And I don't think we are going to find a better player than Bledsoe on a rookie deal, whose team is willing to trade them for Knight - and who plays a position we need.

No, and don't call me a homer...

This might be the first trade proposed on this forum that makes sense.

I'd be willing to talk about this, but I say that as a big believer in Bledsoe.

I saw we do it then move on to drafting a wing player like Shabazz, Oladipo or Bennett. Bledsoe did well when he started in place of Paul this year and is used to playing with a talented front court. Brandon Knight doesnt fit here, its time to accept that and move on.

Most likely Bledsoe will be signed by Dallas though, Clippers cant afford to pay him

SAKURABA216 wrote:I saw we do it then move on to drafting a wing player like Shabazz, Oladipo or Bennett. Bledsoe did well when he started in place of Paul this year and is used to playing with a talented front court. Brandon Knight doesnt fit here, its time to accept that and move on.

Most likely Bledsoe will be signed by Dallas though, Clippers cant afford to pay him

He's not a FA. DAL would have to offer something better than Knight at the same salary, which they don't have.

I agree though. Knight doesn't fit here, and getting a PG in a trade would allow us to draft a SG at 7. Then use all our capspace on getting the best SF, perhaps going after AI or Smith.

I like the idea of Bledsoe better than drafting a PG, because we really need someone with SOME experience if we have any plans of winning next year. A rookie PG on a young team is a recipe for another lotto season, which we can't afford to have again, especially with a new coach in their 1st year. We need to get off to a good start next year.

Bledsoe
Shabazz
Iguodala
Monroe
Drummond

I think that's a playoff team if we get the right coach.

We'd be stupid to pass on that trade, but I don't see LAC doling it. I get the whole contract argument. Yes, the Clips get a replacement with 1 more year on a rookie deal and it's hard to trade players on rookie deals except for other ones, blah blah blah.

But it's still poor value for the Clips. I'd be shocked if they couldn't get a better offer. Then again I'd be shocked if that better offer isn't dismissed as worse by the Pistons board.

I wonder how valuable Knight would have been if he was slowly brought along as a backup playing with very talented players?

Definitely not poor value for the Clipps, they are losing Bledsoe regardless. Knight has very good value to everyone who's not a realgm Piston fan lol

Clarity wrote:Definitely not poor value for the Clipps, they are losing Bledsoe regardless. Knight has very good value to everyone who's not a realgm Piston fan lol

They are NOT losing him for nothing. He's still under contract for another year and the market will decide his value, not pending FA. There will be other suitors for his services. This is not Knight vs. a vacuum, as your post would seem to suggest.

And what exactly is this supposed value based on? Certainly not his on the court play.

If Knight was any good we wouldn't be talking about our need for either a PG or SG. There would be no need for Bledsoe or Oladipo or Burke. But that is not the case.

The whole point of Paul saying he won't be back is because he knows they are likely to trade him before they have to lose him for nothing.

If you think they can get more than Knight, then post who you think they can get instead who is better.

^They can get a package of picks that might carry more value, for one.

What has Knight done thus far to show that he's worth more than a pick at comparable position to where he was originally picked? I think there is definitely an overestimation of Knight's value going on on these forums.

We can hope that he'll turn into a better player, but the rest of this league is going to base his value on what he's actually put on the court the last two seasons. And that hasn't been anything that's going to excite anyone.

Goldtop wrote:The whole point of Paul saying he won't be back is because he knows they are likely to trade him before they have to lose him for nothing.

We always seem to have these circular arguments and I have no desire to get drawn into another one, so I'm just gonna say you are entitled to your opinion.

Not good value for the clips.

You all are so eagered to get a new back-court that your overvaluing Bledsoe big time...Bledsoe jump shot isnt as good as Knight's and his court vision isn't the same...Knight would look great playing behind Chris Paul and a bunch of veterans too...

I'm not high on Bledsoe. I'd rather have Burke at the 1, and then trade Knight for a starting 2 or 3

Truth be told I'm not super high on Bledsoe either. I just think Knight is worse. I'm still for drafting best PG/SG/SF available and then addressing the others via FA/Trade.

We don't have anybody on our roster I want starting at any of those positions next year. But we have a draft pick and plenty of cap room to make something happen, and IF we could acquire a player like Bledsoe via trade without parting with our pick, Monroe or Drummond I'd certainly do it because that would mean we'd still have those assets to make other moves.

I just don't see how trading Knight is going to bring you back a starter.

I am not very high on Knight as a starting PG, but I wouldn't make this trade. Knight is 2 years younger and has more potential, imo. As a starting guard this year (12 games) Bledsoe averages 14 and 5 on 40% shooting.

Id much rather draft burk and put together a package of knght, singler or whatever and picup a sg.

I would try to offer Knight, Singler, #38 for Bledsoe and Grant Hill with Hill retiring. LAC would still laugh at that offer.

I would not trade Knight for Bledsoe -- feels like I'm in the minority on this one.

I feel as though Bledsoe's stats are inflated by the Clipper's up-tempo ran-and-gun system. And even still, this is what he averaged as a starter:

14/5/5 on 40%FG

He's basically a full 2 years older than Knight and as a starter, he produces similar numbers to Knight - even in their up-tempo system.

So we'd be trading for a similar (but older) player basically just to extend him sooner? Doesn't make sense to me.